The department received a proposal from the National Deaf Children\u2019s Society (NDCS) for a central bursary scheme to fund trainee teachers of the hearing impaired. After consideration the department found that it did not provide strong enough evidence that a bursary is the solution to the declining numbers of trained teachers of the deaf.<\/p>
Officials are working with NDCS and other organisations in the sensory impairment sector to identify non-bursary solutions to support teachers wishing to train as teachers of the deaf, or teachers for the sensory impaired more widely.<\/p>
<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4597", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Kemi Badenoch"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Saffron Walden"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Mrs Kemi Badenoch"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-05", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : {"_value" : "281548"} , "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-05T07:44:20.683Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "60"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Education"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Education"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Special Educational Needs: Hearing Impairment"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of a central bursary fund to train teachers specialising in teaching children with a hearing impairment; and what plans he has to address the shortage of specialised teachers in this area.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/151", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Tom Brake"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Carshalton and Wallington"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Tom Brake"} ], "uin" : "281547"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141623", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Ministry of Justice"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141623/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
Information about the outcomes of appeals in the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) is published at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics<\/p>
<\/p>
Decisions on benefit, typically on a person\u2019s entitlement to benefit, or its rate of payment, can be overturned on appeal for a variety of reasons. For instance, further evidence, including oral testimony, may be provided at the hearing. HM Courts & Tribunals Service cannot comment on decisions made by the independent tribunal judiciary.<\/p>
<\/p>
Latest figures (to March 2019) indicate that since Personal Independence Payment was introduced, 4.1 million decisions have been made, and of these, 10% have been appealed and 5% have been overturned at Tribunals.<\/p>
<\/p>
Between April 2014 and December 2018, 4.1 million Employment and Support Allowance (post Work Capability Assessment) decisions have been made. Of these, 8% have been appealed and 4% have been overturned.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4362", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Edward Argar"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Charnwood"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Edward Argar"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281662"} , {"_value" : "281664"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T08:45:59.69Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "54"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Justice"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Justice"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Social Security Benefits: Appeals"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of people who appealed benefits decisions were successful in their appeal in the last 12 months.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/1510", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Edward Miliband"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Doncaster North"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Edward Miliband"} ], "uin" : "281663"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141624", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Ministry of Justice"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141624/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
Information about the outcomes of appeals in the First-tier Tribunal (Social Security and Child Support) is published at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics<\/p>
<\/p>
Decisions on benefit, typically on a person\u2019s entitlement to benefit, or its rate of payment, can be overturned on appeal for a variety of reasons. For instance, further evidence, including oral testimony, may be provided at the hearing. HM Courts & Tribunals Service cannot comment on decisions made by the independent tribunal judiciary.<\/p>
<\/p>
Latest figures (to March 2019) indicate that since Personal Independence Payment was introduced, 4.1 million decisions have been made, and of these, 10% have been appealed and 5% have been overturned at Tribunals.<\/p>
<\/p>
Between April 2014 and December 2018, 4.1 million Employment and Support Allowance (post Work Capability Assessment) decisions have been made. Of these, 8% have been appealed and 4% have been overturned.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4362", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Edward Argar"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Charnwood"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Edward Argar"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281662"} , {"_value" : "281663"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T08:45:59.74Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "54"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Justice"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Justice"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Social Security Benefits: Appeals"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of benefits appeals resulted in a decision being overturned in each Government region in the last 12 months.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/1510", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Edward Miliband"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Doncaster North"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Edward Miliband"} ], "uin" : "281664"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141660", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Home Office"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141660/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
As set out in the Eighth Annual Report to Parliament on the Application of Protocols 19 and 21 to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union (TFEU) in Relation to EU Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Matters (1 December 2016 \u2013 30 November 2017) (Cm 9580), the UK Government decided not to opt into the EU Directive on combating money laundering by criminal law as our domestic legislation is already largely compliant with the Directive\u2019s measures, and in relation to the offences and sentences set out in the Directive, the UK already goes much further. Therefore, it was not considered that opting in would enhance the UK\u2019s approach to tackling money laundering.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4009", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Great Yarmouth"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Brandon Lewis"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-03", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-03T16:12:02.003Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Home Office"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Home Office"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Money Laundering: EU Law"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for what reason the UK has not opted into EU Directive 2018/1673 on combating money laundering by criminal law.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4125", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Catherine McKinnell"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Newcastle upon Tyne North"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Catherine McKinnell"} ], "uin" : "281754"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141661", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Home Office"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141661/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
As set out in the Eighth Annual Report to Parliament on the Application of Protocols 19 and 21 to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union (TFEU) in Relation to EU Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Matters (1 December 2016 \u2013 30 November 2017) (Cm 9580), the UK Government decided not to opt into the EU Directive on combating money laundering by criminal law as our domestic legislation is already largely compliant with the Directive\u2019s measures, and in relation to the offences and sentences set out in the Directive, the UK already goes much further. Therefore, it was not considered that opting in would enhance the UK\u2019s approach to tackling money laundering.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4009", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Sir Brandon Lewis"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Great Yarmouth"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Brandon Lewis"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-03", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-03T16:14:03.427Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Home Office"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Home Office"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Money Laundering: EU Law"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment her Department has made of the equivalence of the UK's corporate liability regime achieve with article 7 (the liability of legal persons) of EU Directive 2018/1673 on combating money laundering by criminal law.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/4125", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Catherine McKinnell"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Newcastle upon Tyne North"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Catherine McKinnell"} ], "uin" : "281755"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141667", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Treasury"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141667/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
The Government recognises the valuable work of employers such as the John Lewis Partnership in providing for the health of their staff.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers have a critical role to play in helping disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to remain in work. Keeping more people in work is good for them. But it is good for the economy too, and it reduces spending on out-of-work benefits, and potentially also demand on the NHS. For employers, investing in employee health and wellbeing can lead to increased workforce productivity and help retain key talent in an organisation.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers normally incur expenditure on employee healthcare for a business purpose and can already deduct this in full when calculating their taxable profits under the longstanding general rules for business expenses. This means employers already receive full tax relief for these costs. The Government therefore does not believe that the existing tax system for business expenses incurred by employers provides a barrier to those wishing to support employees at work.<\/p>
<\/p>
The tax system also ensures employees do not pay income tax or National Insurance Contributions (NICs) on several employer-provided, health-related benefits and there is no corresponding Class 1A NICs liability for employers when there is an exemption for income tax. This includes recommended medical treatment of up to £500 intended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
This particular exemption is targeted at supporting individuals who are expected to reach or who have already reached four weeks of sickness absence. This is because evidence suggests there is an increased likelihood of employees moving on to benefits after an absence lasting four weeks or longer. The £500 cap is in line with the estimated annual cost of the medical treatment that would typically be recommended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
In July, the Government launched a consultation on measures to reduce ill health-related job loss. The broad focus of this consultation chimes with recommendations in the John Lewis report, including potential financial incentives to encourage more employers to access occupational health services, driving early and supportive employer action and spreading best practice. However, it also notes that there is limited evidence that making the tax treatment more generous is the most effective lever to incentivise more employers to start offering occupational health provision, if the initial cost is the main barrier for them.<\/p>
<\/p>
The Government will use the evidence and views gathered during this consultation to develop its proposals further, considering an approach which offers the best value for money and is affordable in the context of the next Spending Review.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3991", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jesse Norman"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Hereford and South Herefordshire"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Jesse Norman"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281710"} , {"_value" : "281711"} , {"_value" : "281712"} , {"_value" : "281713"} , {"_value" : "281714"} , {"_value" : "281715"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T13:08:28.083Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "14"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Occupational Health"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the findings of the John Lewis Partnership Working Well report, published on 11 June 2019 on the benefits to public services of greater workplace health prevention and early intervention; and what steps he plans to take ensure that taxation incentivises early intervention from employers.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3989", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jack Lopresti"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Filton and Bradley Stoke"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Jack Lopresti"} ], "uin" : "281709"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141668", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Treasury"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141668/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
The Government recognises the valuable work of employers such as the John Lewis Partnership in providing for the health of their staff.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers have a critical role to play in helping disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to remain in work. Keeping more people in work is good for them. But it is good for the economy too, and it reduces spending on out-of-work benefits, and potentially also demand on the NHS. For employers, investing in employee health and wellbeing can lead to increased workforce productivity and help retain key talent in an organisation.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers normally incur expenditure on employee healthcare for a business purpose and can already deduct this in full when calculating their taxable profits under the longstanding general rules for business expenses. This means employers already receive full tax relief for these costs. The Government therefore does not believe that the existing tax system for business expenses incurred by employers provides a barrier to those wishing to support employees at work.<\/p>
<\/p>
The tax system also ensures employees do not pay income tax or National Insurance Contributions (NICs) on several employer-provided, health-related benefits and there is no corresponding Class 1A NICs liability for employers when there is an exemption for income tax. This includes recommended medical treatment of up to £500 intended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
This particular exemption is targeted at supporting individuals who are expected to reach or who have already reached four weeks of sickness absence. This is because evidence suggests there is an increased likelihood of employees moving on to benefits after an absence lasting four weeks or longer. The £500 cap is in line with the estimated annual cost of the medical treatment that would typically be recommended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
In July, the Government launched a consultation on measures to reduce ill health-related job loss. The broad focus of this consultation chimes with recommendations in the John Lewis report, including potential financial incentives to encourage more employers to access occupational health services, driving early and supportive employer action and spreading best practice. However, it also notes that there is limited evidence that making the tax treatment more generous is the most effective lever to incentivise more employers to start offering occupational health provision, if the initial cost is the main barrier for them.<\/p>
<\/p>
The Government will use the evidence and views gathered during this consultation to develop its proposals further, considering an approach which offers the best value for money and is affordable in the context of the next Spending Review.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3991", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jesse Norman"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Hereford and South Herefordshire"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Jesse Norman"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281709"} , {"_value" : "281711"} , {"_value" : "281712"} , {"_value" : "281713"} , {"_value" : "281714"} , {"_value" : "281715"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T13:08:28.133Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "14"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Occupational Health: Cost Effectiveness"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential benefit to the public purse of workers receiving workplace medical treatment at work instead of after 28 consecutive days of absence.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3989", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jack Lopresti"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Filton and Bradley Stoke"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Jack Lopresti"} ], "uin" : "281710"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141669", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Treasury"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141669/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
The Government recognises the valuable work of employers such as the John Lewis Partnership in providing for the health of their staff.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers have a critical role to play in helping disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to remain in work. Keeping more people in work is good for them. But it is good for the economy too, and it reduces spending on out-of-work benefits, and potentially also demand on the NHS. For employers, investing in employee health and wellbeing can lead to increased workforce productivity and help retain key talent in an organisation.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers normally incur expenditure on employee healthcare for a business purpose and can already deduct this in full when calculating their taxable profits under the longstanding general rules for business expenses. This means employers already receive full tax relief for these costs. The Government therefore does not believe that the existing tax system for business expenses incurred by employers provides a barrier to those wishing to support employees at work.<\/p>
<\/p>
The tax system also ensures employees do not pay income tax or National Insurance Contributions (NICs) on several employer-provided, health-related benefits and there is no corresponding Class 1A NICs liability for employers when there is an exemption for income tax. This includes recommended medical treatment of up to £500 intended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
This particular exemption is targeted at supporting individuals who are expected to reach or who have already reached four weeks of sickness absence. This is because evidence suggests there is an increased likelihood of employees moving on to benefits after an absence lasting four weeks or longer. The £500 cap is in line with the estimated annual cost of the medical treatment that would typically be recommended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
In July, the Government launched a consultation on measures to reduce ill health-related job loss. The broad focus of this consultation chimes with recommendations in the John Lewis report, including potential financial incentives to encourage more employers to access occupational health services, driving early and supportive employer action and spreading best practice. However, it also notes that there is limited evidence that making the tax treatment more generous is the most effective lever to incentivise more employers to start offering occupational health provision, if the initial cost is the main barrier for them.<\/p>
<\/p>
The Government will use the evidence and views gathered during this consultation to develop its proposals further, considering an approach which offers the best value for money and is affordable in the context of the next Spending Review.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3991", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jesse Norman"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Hereford and South Herefordshire"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Jesse Norman"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281709"} , {"_value" : "281710"} , {"_value" : "281712"} , {"_value" : "281713"} , {"_value" : "281714"} , {"_value" : "281715"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T13:08:28.18Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "14"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Occupational Health: Taxation"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the effect of the taxation of employees with occupational health support on the take-up of those services by low paid workers.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3989", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jack Lopresti"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Filton and Bradley Stoke"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Jack Lopresti"} ], "uin" : "281711"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141670", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Treasury"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141670/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "
The Government recognises the valuable work of employers such as the John Lewis Partnership in providing for the health of their staff.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers have a critical role to play in helping disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to remain in work. Keeping more people in work is good for them. But it is good for the economy too, and it reduces spending on out-of-work benefits, and potentially also demand on the NHS. For employers, investing in employee health and wellbeing can lead to increased workforce productivity and help retain key talent in an organisation.<\/p>
<\/p>
Employers normally incur expenditure on employee healthcare for a business purpose and can already deduct this in full when calculating their taxable profits under the longstanding general rules for business expenses. This means employers already receive full tax relief for these costs. The Government therefore does not believe that the existing tax system for business expenses incurred by employers provides a barrier to those wishing to support employees at work.<\/p>
<\/p>
The tax system also ensures employees do not pay income tax or National Insurance Contributions (NICs) on several employer-provided, health-related benefits and there is no corresponding Class 1A NICs liability for employers when there is an exemption for income tax. This includes recommended medical treatment of up to £500 intended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
This particular exemption is targeted at supporting individuals who are expected to reach or who have already reached four weeks of sickness absence. This is because evidence suggests there is an increased likelihood of employees moving on to benefits after an absence lasting four weeks or longer. The £500 cap is in line with the estimated annual cost of the medical treatment that would typically be recommended to help employees return to work.<\/p>
<\/p>
In July, the Government launched a consultation on measures to reduce ill health-related job loss. The broad focus of this consultation chimes with recommendations in the John Lewis report, including potential financial incentives to encourage more employers to access occupational health services, driving early and supportive employer action and spreading best practice. However, it also notes that there is limited evidence that making the tax treatment more generous is the most effective lever to incentivise more employers to start offering occupational health provision, if the initial cost is the main barrier for them.<\/p>
<\/p>
The Government will use the evidence and views gathered during this consultation to develop its proposals further, considering an approach which offers the best value for money and is affordable in the context of the next Spending Review.<\/p>"} , "answeringMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3991", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jesse Norman"} } , "answeringMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Hereford and South Herefordshire"} , "answeringMemberPrinted" : {"_value" : "Jesse Norman"} , "dateOfAnswer" : {"_value" : "2019-09-09", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "groupedQuestionUIN" : [{"_value" : "281709"} , {"_value" : "281710"} , {"_value" : "281711"} , {"_value" : "281713"} , {"_value" : "281714"} , {"_value" : "281715"} ], "isMinisterialCorrection" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "questionFirstAnswered" : [{"_value" : "2019-09-09T13:08:28.227Z", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} ]} , "answeringDeptId" : {"_value" : "14"} , "answeringDeptShortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "answeringDeptSortName" : {"_value" : "Treasury"} , "date" : {"_value" : "2019-07-24", "_datatype" : "dateTime"} , "hansardHeading" : {"_value" : "Occupational Health: Taxation"} , "houseId" : {"_value" : "1"} , "legislature" : [{"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/terms/25259", "prefLabel" : {"_value" : "House of Commons"} } ], "questionText" : "To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies on (a) health prevention and (b) early intervention of the (a) conditions in relation to 28 day consecutive absence and (b)requirement that a health condition must be a direct result of work in the exemption for employer-funded recommended medical treatment under section 320C of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003.", "registeredInterest" : {"_value" : "false", "_datatype" : "boolean"} , "tablingMember" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/members/3989", "label" : {"_value" : "Biography information for Jack Lopresti"} } , "tablingMemberConstituency" : {"_value" : "Filton and Bradley Stoke"} , "tablingMemberPrinted" : [{"_value" : "Jack Lopresti"} ], "uin" : "281712"} , {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141676", "AnsweringBody" : [{"_value" : "Treasury"} ], "answer" : {"_about" : "http://data.parliament.uk/resources/1141676/answer", "answerText" : {"_value" : "